Letters to the Editor for April 3, 2013

Any law that is passed that requires people who have been law-abiding to fulfill some requirement and change their life in order to not be "guilty" of a newly created crime will be in itself a crime.

If suddenly I were to have to register or turn in items that I legally own or have made -- when I am not bothering anybody -- would violate much of what has made the United States great, the land of the free, and is embedded in that document that many politicians hate - the Constitution, which limits their powers.

Advertisement

I, for one, would not turn in or register any item which I legally own and I suspect that there are many who feel this way.

Well, if some of the proposed laws are passed, the only way they could be meaningfully enforced would be to search the homes of people suspected of owning certain items.

That would be acceptable if it might stop a future Newtown, right?

If I behave as I say I will -- refuse to turn over any items I now legally own or have made and am thrown in prison, my home should be searched and I should go to prison -- I deserve it because it might stop a future Newton, right?

Am I the only one seeing what is wrong here? Government is violating all that made the U.S. that shining light.

Oh, but look at what that evil person has written.

And when a home was searched, multiple rolls of duct tape were found.

And computers seized held many rants and raves (most of which you may have read in this paper) showing an unbalanced and anti-social attitude.

And it's all good because it might stop a future Newtown. So really, all houses should be searched for the suddenly illegal items, no matter that the behavior of the person has never shown them to be any kind of a threat. But they don't have a politically correct attitude so you'd better watch out.

It is all so sick when there are real things that can be done to lessen the chance for future Newtowns but they will not be done. Better to turn the current law abiding into criminals.

She could be right, as many are too focused on an agenda and not on really solving problems.

Now shall we sit and discuss the many productive solutions which exist, or is it too late? That would be sad.

-- Ben Davidson, Winsted

Growing an olive branch of peace in Middle East

The editorial of March 29, "A secure Israel is linked to an 'absence of war,'" touched on some significant points.

To be sure, "former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon offered an olive branch in 2005 with the evacuation of 8,500 Jewish settlers from 21 Gaza settlements on territory claimed by Palestinians."

But what should be underscored is the Palestinian response to this overture: more than 10,000 rockets fired into Israel - targeted at civilian populations.

As the editorial reminds us, this past week, Jews all over the world celebrated Passover, a remembrance of the 3,500-year-old history of the exodus of the Hebrew slaves from Egypt.

So, too, should the world remember not only Ariel Sharon's olive branch, but the repeated offers of peace made by Israel to the Palestinians: first in 1947 after the initial U.N.-declared partition, then in 1967 after Israel won the miraculous Six-day War, again in 2000 and 2001 at the Camp David and Taba Summits, respectively, and most recently in 2008 by the Olmert Administration.

It must further not be forgotten that Israel was born of the persecution and expulsion of Jews from Arab lands from Marrakesh to Mashhad, in the years 1100 - 1948. Unfortunately, for all inhabitants of this troubled land - Jew and Palestinian alike - peace is not in their midst, but only in their minds.

A necessary step toward making peace a reality is to recognize an olive branch, and see to it that it grows into a tree.